Preprint a Conceptual Model of Immersive Experience H Lee 2020
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Preprint: A Conceptual Model of Immersive Experience in Extended Reality DOI:10.31234/osf.io/sefkh A Conceptual Model of Immersive Experience in Extended Reality Hyunkook Lee ([email protected]) Applied Psychoacoustics Lab (APL), University of Huddersfield, HD1 3DH, UK. ABSTRACT The term immersion or immersive is popularly used when describing and evaluating technologies in the area of extended reality (i.e., virtual/augmented/mixed reality). Much research has been conducted on immersion over the last few decades. However, there is still a lack of consistency in how the term is defined in the literature. Presence and involvement are other prominent concepts studied in the field of extended reality. However, there is currently no consensus on their relationship with immersion among researchers. This paper first discusses different dimensions of immersion as well as those of presence and involvement, aiming to resolve potential confusion around the terms and synthesise a relationship among them. From this, a new conceptual model of immersive experience for future studies in extended reality is proposed. The model defines physical presence, social/self presence and involvement as the main high-level attributes that collectively lead to an immersive experience. Each pair of the three attributes shares a common lower-level attribute of sensory, narrative or task/motor engagement, which is an initial step towards the higher-level experience. Plausibility, interactivity and interestingness are defined as the main properties of immersive system and content, each of which is biased by a subjective factor: internal reference, skills/knowledge and personal preference, respectively. Keywords: Immersion, immersive experience, conceptual model, extended reality, presence, involvement 1 Preprint: A Conceptual Model of Immersive Experience in Extended Reality DOI:10.31234/osf.io/sefkh 0 INTRODUCTION The last decade saw a significant advancement of technologies for virtual reality (VR), augmented reality (AR) and mixed reality (MR), all of which are encompassed in the umbrella term extended reality (XR). In VR, the user is visually and aurally occluded from the physical environment by wearing a head-mount display (HMD) and headphones, whereas in AR, the user interacts with virtual objects superimposed onto the physical environment seen through special glasses or the screen of mobile device. MR blends both VR and AR experiences. Today XR technologies are being adopted in an increasing number of applications, such as games (Carvalho, Soares, Neves, Soares, & Lins, 2014), audio-visual entertainment (Slater & Sanchez-Vives, 2016), medicine (Andrews, Southworth, Silva, & Silva, 2016), tourism (Tussyadiah, Wang, Jung, & tom Dieck, 2018), education (Freina & Ott, 2015), etc. It is frequently described that XR applications aim to provide the user with an immersive experience. In the industry, the term immersive has become a popular marketing term for XR technologies. In academia, however, there has been much debate on the meaning of immersion and the relationship among immersion and other related concepts such as presence and involvement. However, there still exists no standard definition of immersion. Different models tend to use different terms with overlapping meanings or identical terms with slightly different meanings depending on the context. More importantly, there is no global conceptual framework for measuring the level of immersive experience that can be applied in a wide range of XR applications. Even though several multidimensional models of immersion have been proposed (e.g., (Arsenault, 2005; Brown & Cairns, 2004; Calleja, 2007; Ermi & Mäyrä, 2005; Ryan, 2003)), most of them are specific to the contexts of video games, and therefore it might be difficult to apply them directly in other contexts. It is also found in the literature that terms presence, involvement or engagement are often used interchangeably with immersion, whereas other researchers strictly distinguish them as different concepts. The inconsistency and ambiguity in the terminology could cause confusion in comparing different studies. From the above background, the present paper aims to define relationships among various concepts related to immersion and integrate them into a general conceptual model of immersive experience. Firstly, Section 1 discusses the multidimensionality of immersion and identify the source of confusion around the term. From this, a standard terminology is proposed for the purpose of consistency. Section 2 briefly explicates the concepts of physical presence, social/self presence and involvement, which are considered as the main underlying 2 Preprint: A Conceptual Model of Immersive Experience in Extended Reality DOI:10.31234/osf.io/sefkh factors of immersive experience in this paper, and how each concept is related to immersive experience. Based on the discussions provided in Sections 1 and 2, Section 3 proposes and details a conceptual model of immersive experience. The model establishes a relationship among the high-level concepts physical presence, social/self presence and involvement in terms of immersive experience, and identifies the associated properties of immersive system and content as well as potential subjective factors. 1 MULTIDIMENSIONALITY OF IMMERSION Although there is still no standard definition of immersion, the general consensus in the literature seems to be that immersion is a multidimensional construct. As summarised in Table 1, researchers have proposed different dimensions of immersion using various descriptive words, e.g., perceptual and psychological immersion (Lombard & Ditton, 1997), sensory, imaginative and challenge-based immersion (Ermi & Mäyrä, 2005), sensory, fictional and systemic immersion (Arsenault, 2005), narrative and ludic immersion (Ryan, 2003), narrative and strategic/tactical immersion (Adams & Rollings, 2007). However, some of these terms largely overlap in their meanings, and seem to connote the general ideas of either ‘presence’ or ‘involvement’, which are explicated in Section 2.1. For example, Biocca and Delaney (1995) defined perceptual immersion as “the degree to which a virtual environment submerges the perceptual system of the user”. The same term is used by McMahan (2013) to describe the sensation of being surrounded by a virtual environment (VE), which is also implied in the definition of sensory immersion by Ermi and Mäyrä (2005). These terms commonly describe a passive experience of immersion (Eaton & Lee, 2019), which is induced by the sensory simulation of a technology. They are also commonly related to the concept of ‘presence’. The other immersion terms above describe an active (cognitive) experience of immersion (Eaton & Lee, 2019). For instance, imaginative immersion (Ermi & Mäyrä, 2005) and narrative immersion (Adams & Rollings, 2007; Ryan, 2003) commonly require involvement in the narrative of a content. Challenge-based immersion, ludic immersion, systemic immersion and strategy/tactical immersion are commonly to do with involvement in a challenging task or an activity. In addition, the Oxford Learner’s Dictionaries also provide two separate definitions of immersion; (i) “the act of putting somebody/something into a liquid, especially so that they or it are completely covered; the state of being covered by a liquid”, and (ii) “the state of being completely involved in something”. The first definition is often used as a metaphor for perceptual or sensory immersion, e.g.,(Murray, 1997, pp. 98-99), whereas the second one is essentially a cognitive phenomenon, which does not necessarily require a sensory simulation. 3 Preprint: A Conceptual Model of Immersive Experience in Extended Reality DOI:10.31234/osf.io/sefkh Table 1. Summary of different immersion terms from the literature. Immersion terms Descriptions Connoted concept “the degree to which a virtual environment submerges the perceptual system of the user” (F Perceptual (F Biocca & Biocca & Delaney, 1995); Delaney, 1995; McMahan, The sensation of being surrounded 2013) by a virtual environment Presence (McMahan, 2013) The state of being surrounded by Sensory (Ermi & Mäyrä, audio-visual stimuli that can 2005) “overpower the sensory information coming from the real world” Imaginative (Ermi & Mäyrä, 2005) The state of being heavily involved Involvement Fictional (Arsenault, 2005) (cognitively absorbed) in the story in a narrative of a world and by its characters. content Narrative (Adams & Rollings, 2007; Ryan, 2003) Ludic (Ryan, 2003) Challenge-based (Ermi & The stage of being heavily involved Involvement in a challenging task or an activity in a task or an Mäyrä, 2005) that requires mental or/and motor activity Systemic (Arsenault, 2005) skills. Strategic and Tactical (Adams & Rollings, 2007) Several researchers attempted to provide standalone definitions of immersion (e.g., (Agrawal, Simon, Bech, Bærentsen, & Forchhammer, 2020; Murray, 1997; Witmer & Singer, 1998) However, such definitions tend to be biased towards only one dimension of immersion. For example, Witmer and Singer (1998) defines immersion as “a psychological state characterized by perceiving oneself to be enveloped by, included in, and interacting with an environment that provides a continuous stream of stimuli and experiences”. Whilst this definition mainly describes the perceptual aspect of the experience provided by the system, the cognitive aspect of the experience is not clearly implied. Agrawal et al. (2020), on the other hand, define immersion as “a phenomenon